Post by WLViking on Apr 21, 2013 22:40:57 GMT -5

I agree with the thoughts on voting to move someone to 3 votes. It removes a runoff and makes you a target. However, the goal in day 1 is not to get to a runoff. You either A) thought roo or I were suspicious and did not want us taken out, but you already said that you are leaning towards me being a townie. That adds 2 people to your hypothetical pool who would be better candidates for a runoff, which means they would be better people to poke and see where they stand. Yes, they could retaliate, but that would give you additional information, right? So you were not really left with LD and Bone.

Secondly, I agree that generalizations are wrong and roll odds are reset every game, and in fact, usually I argue the same thing every game. Where your argument falls down though is that even with 7 newish players, there are still 4 experienced players, and the odds favor at least 1 of those being mafia and coaching. Plus, it could be argued that Jimmyroo, Boneroo, and Roonectar should not be considered newish players, since they each have played several games and know most of the tendencies. If they know the tendencies and what has worked to frame people in the past, they know what will work with newer players like yourself going forward. So yes, this game is like previous games even though there are unknowns such as yourself that need to be worked out.

Finally, I explained about Hakuna and LLL. I do not trust either of them and both are difficult in the best of times to figure out. Not to say they are guilty, but do not take explanations as any indicator in game.

As I said, I appreciate your style, especially since you are new, and we are trying to see how you tick. You will find that being verbose and stirring up the pot will get you placed in a day 1 runoff more often then not. I have only avoided it twice in the dozen games I have played, and ended up in the second day runoff in both of those. Either way, I appreciate the posting and explaining, and try to do the same for you and anyone else.

Plus, it could be argued that Jimmyroo, Boneroo, and Roonectar should not be considered newish players, since they each have played several games and know most of the tendencies.

Am I reading that right? First you suggest because we have 7 "newish" players in the game that I should reconsider targeting you and Ld. Then you argue against yourself that they shouldn't be considered newish players?

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 0:08:34 GMT -5

Came back to explain my lock in. Tejas ignored everything else I put in my post and instead chose to nitpick on what is an internal classification that changes for me depending on how you look at the game. Tejas, you have half a dozen of these I could go into.

Also, look who he has tried to get people voting for. LD, Me, and to a lesser extent, Bone. All easier targets since at least LD and I do things that make people uncomfortable. Not saying LD is innocent but I know I am.

You all can decide what you like. I know I am a townie and suspect Tejas is Mafia. After that, i am still working on it.

Post by Tejas on Apr 22, 2013 1:20:03 GMT -5

Came back to explain my lock in. Tejas ignored everything else I put in my post and instead chose to nitpick on what is an internal classification that changes for me depending on how you look at the game. Tejas, you have half a dozen of these I could go into.

Also, look who he has tried to get people voting for. LD, Me, and to a lesser extent, Bone. All easier targets since at least LD and I do things that make people uncomfortable. Not saying LD is innocent but I know I am.

You all can decide what you like. I know I am a townie and suspect Tejas is Mafia. After that, i am still working on it.

I honestly didn't think anything else needed an explanation. But since you want one I guess I'll have a crack at it.

I agree with the thoughts on voting to move someone to 3 votes. It removes a runoff and makes you a target. However, the goal in day 1 is not to get to a runoff. You either A) thought roo or I were suspicious and did not want us taken out, but you already said that you are leaning towards me being a townie. That adds 2 people to your hypothetical pool who would be better candidates for a runoff, which means they would be better people to poke and see where they stand. Yes, they could retaliate, but that would give you additional information, right? So you were not really left with LD and Bone.

You say the goal in day 1 is not to get a runoff?? I thought the goal was to get a runoff so we have more votes and more voting patterns to go off of. So to me that doesn't make very much sense. And I don't understand why your questioning the way I voted. I already explained my logic.

-Obviously didn't vote for roonectar or viking since they were already in the runoff. -Didn't vote for ody or LLL because that would only put them at 1 vote -I didn't vote for jimmy, bogart, or krissy because their vote put roo & viking in the runoff. So I was afraid that if I put one of them in the 3 person runoff they would retaliate and switch their vote to me. And essentially we'd be back to a 2 person runoff. -So it was between you and boner.

So to me your first paragraph was irrelevant. If anything we have a difference in strategy but thats it.

Secondly, I agree that generalizations are wrong and roll odds are reset every game, and in fact, usually I argue the same thing every game. Where your argument falls down though is that even with 7 newish players, there are still 4 experienced players, and the odds favor at least 1 of those being mafia and coaching. Plus, it could be argued that Jimmyroo, Boneroo, and Roonectar should not be considered newish players, since they each have played several games and know most of the tendencies. If they know the tendencies and what has worked to frame people in the past, they know what will work with newer players like yourself going forward. So yes, this game is like previous games even though there are unknowns such as yourself that need to be worked out.

It seems like every new person who plays always get accused of being coached. I've given my case why none of the experienced players could be my coach because they've been away, and you've stated you take it with a grain of salt. I've made my case and you made yours. I don't think theirs much to say.

Finally, I explained about Hakuna and LLL. I do not trust either of them and both are difficult in the best of times to figure out. Not to say they are guilty, but do not take explanations as any indicator in game.

As I said, I appreciate your style, especially since you are new, and we are trying to see how you tick. You will find that being verbose and stirring up the pot will get you placed in a day 1 runoff more often then not. I have only avoided it twice in the dozen games I have played, and ended up in the second day runoff in both of those. Either way, I appreciate the posting and explaining, and try to do the same for you and anyone else.

Nothing to argue here. And I appreciate you for appreciating my playing style, even though your trying to off me lol. Its still better than being silent.

Post by Tejas on Apr 22, 2013 1:29:33 GMT -5

No explanation should be needed. I would really like to see you and Ld in the runoff now. Thoughts anyone?

Actually, I would like an explanation. If you would like Viking and LD in the runoff, why did you take your vote off LD? If you kept your vote as it was, both would be in the runoff. By switching to viking the vote is Viking-3, Tejas-2, and a few people with 1. You're making the runoff pool smaller, which isn't what any townies should want. And its counter intuitive to expect massive vote changes by noon tomorrow, since everyone has been away. You even acknowledged that reasoning when you originally explained your vote for LD.

Soooo...the point I'm trying to get at is that I prefer a 3 or 4 person runoff, not 2. Not sure how your vote switch helps except for really seeming saving LD pretty nicely (since he's only down to 1 vote and Viking is now up to 3). Personally, I was OK with the 3 of you in the runoff or even adding a 4th. But right now your vote is making it more likely that we only have 2 people in the runoff.

Jimmy my explanation to change to WLViking was because he suggested to rethink voting for him or Ld because we have "newish" players. Then he contradicted himself by saying that you really cant consider those players "newish". He then calls it a internal classification which means he'll flip flop to save his ass.

And jimmy honestly I didn't think about it that way. I want to make it as easy as possible for a 3 person runoff.

Post by roonectar on Apr 22, 2013 5:32:53 GMT -5

The only things I find suspicious are your vote switches and not changing your name back.

The only reason you would strategically refuse to change your name back would be to hide some of your posts. But it's really early to hide a couple votes and posts and downright insulting if you think some of us wouldn't notice, as well as risky.

All I know is you post ALOT. You reference them later with "like I explained before" or something along those lines. Either way I hardly ever have a correct guess. If you are townie prove it because posting a ton just makes you active not innocent

Seeing as how I vote switch ever game, I have explained why I do it, and I have played at least half a dozen games with you, I fail to see why you feel this would be suspicious. If anything, it would be suspicious if I crawled under a rock like you do.

As for changing my name, I felt like I needed a switch the other night in chat. It was the first page and not all the votes were even in. I wanted a change, and will change it to what I want after the game. Sorry if you find that too confusing or tough to follow.

And I have already said I post a lot and it has no reference to whether I am guilty or innocent. I will say that it makes me more of a target in the first day, which seems to be the case now.

However, my question for you roo is why all this made you so mad? I ask for you to post every game I play and you usually do not get so irritated. So why now?

Your playing style has always been suspicious to me. From my first game on I have always suspected you, sometimes I'm right sometimes I'm not you are hard to get a bead on. I don't know why your playing style screams innocent and mine shouts guilty all the time. Don't confuse irritation with participation. Try not to get butt hurt because your the focal point. Your the only one really poking, prodding and switching votes numerous times. You should expect some sort of suspicion

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 7:14:40 GMT -5

roonectar, I could give a rats @ss if you figure out what my role is. You are rarely right, and een when you are no one listens because of how you play. You have been inspector 2 times. The first you killed the town because the fake (Hakuna in this case I beleive) was much more believable when he was partnered with LLL. And last game, you nearly killed the town again. If it was not for Quacker and Hakuna, the town would have died. So, as I said, I do not care if you get it right. I am much more concerned figuring out what YOU are. I know this is harsh, but there is no other way to say it.

Tejas You can continue to try and twist what I say all you want, but the goal of any townie is never a runoff. The goal is to kill Mafia members. While a runoff helps, getting to a runoff is never the point of the game, and I believe I made that point to you already in an earlier post.

You did explain your logic, but there are big holes in it, and when I point those holes out, you just say you already explained your logic. If at the time you thought I was a townie, why not add the 2 voting for a townie to the pool? You never explained that. The only explanation that makes sense in this case is that you did not want to incriminate yourself, so we are back to my original thesis. Your vote switch and reasoning is suspicious.

And as for being coached, I stand by that statement. People are accused of it from time to time, but that does not make it untrue. I think you and I are at an impasse. I believe you are mafia and really, there is not much you can do to change that. At this point, I will leave it to the rest of the town, and answer any questions they have.

Post by roonectar on Apr 22, 2013 8:07:33 GMT -5

If I'm that detrimental to your style and the town Viking, rally the troops and vote me out. You'll talk enough to void out any evidence of innocence or guilt so arguing with you is pretty pointless especially this early. The only way to play with you is get out of the way

Post by krissyjo on Apr 22, 2013 8:16:01 GMT -5

That should put you at 2, viking at 2, and LD at 1, because you had a vote on LD before you switched to viking and that's what was putting LD in the runoff. Right now we're at a 2 person runoff between tejas and viking.

Post by Hakuna on Apr 22, 2013 8:18:53 GMT -5

Ok so I'm back and trying to catch up. I didnt expect my placeholder vote to be such in the middle of things, but I'm actually totally fine with it. Since I was playing catchup, it was ingesting to me that my initial thought about Tejas's early post was that it was coached, only to continue reading and see I wasn't the only one. I think who ever brought up potential coaches makes a very valid point. The only one I think who could have "coached" that post would have been Viking and since it was him the brought this to the front makes that unlikely(I'm saying unlikely because I could see Viking pulling something like that, just not this early in the game where there wasnt any real need to do something that elaborate). My other thought would be Tejas took up an early leadership role of an inexperienced mafia and it backfired but is doing a good job completely taking the heat of the other 2 and just going with it. I'll admit, if never played where I have actually had to go back and read a few pages and is proving difficult in shaping my own opinions, basically at the time being I think Viking is a townie as he seemed to have no problem getting right in the thick of things which he seems to do more freely when he is a townie, so I think part of me is just following his leads til I get fully caught up and have my own idea of what is going on. I do think there are a lot of people with votes right now that will tell us a lot once the whack comes, so I'm just staying put.

Post by krissyjo on Apr 22, 2013 8:20:49 GMT -5

That should put you at 2, viking at 2, and LD at 1, because you had a vote on LD before you switched to viking and that's what was putting LD in the runoff. Right now we're at a 2 person runoff between tejas and viking.

Post by LoveLuckLaughter on Apr 22, 2013 8:51:22 GMT -5

Just a few quick notes. I'm back. I've rested.

Initially the LD/Viking runoff raised my red flags because, as Viking pointed out, this has been a common Mafia tactic in the past. It stems from LD doing a few fake Inspector moves, but he was really a TOWNIE. It pissed some people off, and he became an immediate first round pick off. Mafia started using that to their advantage. Viking's targeting started because his intense playing style rubbed some people the wrong way. So people started putting him in runoffs, and Mafia picked up on that.

The only hitch I see with this theory is that there are too many players who didn't play back then. So no one has had those experiences, thus it makes it a tough sell to the newer players. They don't have the "Once bitten, twice shy" feelings for Mafia to try to take advantage of. Now, there could, I guess, be a really sleuth Newer Mafia player who went back and actually read a game from the past and is playing this up for the handful of us who played back then. Or an experienced Mafia with some newbs, trying to conjure up some feelings from the past among us veterans. However, both of these theories seem unlikely, and I've come to the decision that it is probably just coincidence.

As far as runoffs go, any runoff is a good runoff first round. We have little to go on and this will set up a sense of voting patterns for us so that we can more easily sniff out Mafia. Two tiered runoffs with as few of players in it as possible is my prefer

Post by LoveLuckLaughter on Apr 22, 2013 8:56:30 GMT -5

Sorry, my phone is being wonky.

Anyway, I think that 3 and then 2 person, two tiered runoffs are best. Because Mafia can't spread their votes out as thin. I think it makes it easier for us townies to pick up on the voting patterns. I know a lot of people disagree with this theory, Viking likes more in a runoff, for instance. Just my two cents

I see some voting changes. Ive said this before. Voting changes that end up pulling one person out of harms way and throwing another in really picque my interest.

Post by LoveLuckLaughter on Apr 22, 2013 9:07:36 GMT -5

Also, keep in mind that Mafia has a huge advantage over us right now. They know who mafia is. They can talk. They are working together. We are shooting blind, and half the time it is at one another. In the first rounds, Mafia has the ability to control the runoffs to their advantage for the most part. That is why it is so important to pay attention to the voting patterns and shifts and changes in voting.

Post by odysseus on Apr 22, 2013 9:07:50 GMT -5

I think I'm going to side with Tejas on this one. Viking, I haven't played with you yet, so I'm not sure of your style. Seems very similar to the way SFA and Quacker were playing last time. They were townies, but I am not going to give anyone the benefit of the doubt just because it's similar to another situation. I guess I understand how Tejas may sound coached, but I got that every game I've played on here so far, and I've been townie every time. I don't think just because a player is willing to talk and may have some experience with mafia outside of inforoo it automatically makes them suspicious as "being coached." I also don't see how Viking doesn't feel like his posts were contradictory. Before I ever got to Tejas' post calling you out on it, I thought it myself.

All that being said, assuming the runoff is shaped up to be Tejas, LD, and Viking, I'm not going to change my vote until the runoff begins. Just because I agree with Tejas now doesn't mean I won't change, but I honestly see Viking as more suspicious at this point.

And of course since I'm aligning myself with that line of thinking, I'm the next prime suspect for mafia, but IDGAF, it seems to happen to me a lot.

Post by odysseus on Apr 22, 2013 9:11:20 GMT -5

And to the statement of Viking saying that a runoff isn't the objective, but voting off mafia is. Give me a quacking break. No shiz that's the point, but to act like runoffs aren't the best way to have evidence in the end is just terrible strategy. I don't know why, but that statement really pissed me off.

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 9:55:10 GMT -5

And to the statement of Viking saying that a runoff isn't the objective, but voting off mafia is. Give me a quacking break. No shiz that's the point, but to act like runoffs aren't the best way to have evidence in the end is just terrible strategy. I don't know why, but that statement really pissed me off.

Then go and be butt hurt with roonectar about the way I play. There are no quacking breaks, and I do not play to make you like me. The point is to kill mafia, not to form runoffs. While a runoff is a good tool, randomly dumping people into one is not the best way to set it up. You have not killed a mafia member in day one in either game you played. If you want to complain and commiserate about people saying you are coached, go for it. There are a few other players who would sympathize with you in this game. But if you want to help win the game for the townies (Because I actually think you are a townie unlike roonectar and Tejas) you can get on board and try and help win this thing.

If Tejas wants to nitpick, then so can I, although that tends to piss people off. Newish is not even a word. It was one I made up to help make the point. I tend to overlook roo for reasons I stated above, gave Bone the benefit after playing 3 games, and did not think about Jimmyroo, since he played a lot of games when I took a break for a while. If you feel like this is the most relevant detail out of everything I posted, then you are obviously grasping at a straw or two.

LoveLuckLaughter, I will disagree in your assessment of whether history has any impact in this game since there are enough players who have played before and people do read old games. It would only take 1 or 2. But we can agree to disagree on that. I DO AGREE on two tiered runoffs.

I lost my last game as a townie because I tried to play nice in the sandbox. Fuck that. I have no idea why or how everyone is ok with LD being in this runoff. I do not know his role, but he has done nothing at this point to make people believe he is suspicious. I am resigned to be in this runoff, and I am glad tejas is in it too.

Hakuna, I appreciate the vote of confidence and thank you for pointing out a mafia tic I have to correct going forward the next time I am mafia.

TL;DR Tejas is most likely mafia. If you all want to just sit there and let the dust settle in the runoff, go for it. I am not saying lets not have a runoff. I am saying lets think critically about who the 3rd and potentially 4th member of the runoff should be. In my opinion, roo is the prime candidate for the third. Why? Even if LD is in the runoff, it is going to be dominated by Tejas v Viking. If Roo is in it, he has been a part of the conversation and would not be excluded to the extent that LD would. Having LD in now in the situation we are in wastes the chance to talk about LD until day 3 or so. You are just throwing a live body in there as a place holder.

At this point, I am sick of putting the bullseye on my back trying to influence the game. You can all do what you want.

Post by odysseus on Apr 22, 2013 10:13:03 GMT -5

And to the statement of Viking saying that a runoff isn't the objective, but voting off mafia is. Give me a quacking break. No shiz that's the point, but to act like runoffs aren't the best way to have evidence in the end is just terrible strategy. I don't know why, but that statement really pissed me off.

Then go and be butt hurt with roonectar about the way I play. There are no quacking breaks, and I do not play to make you like me. The point is to kill mafia, not to form runoffs. While a runoff is a good tool, randomly dumping people into one is not the best way to set it up. You have not killed a mafia member in day one in either game you played. If you want to complain and commiserate about people saying you are coached, go for it. There are a few other players who would sympathize with you in this game. But if you want to help win the game for the townies (Because I actually think you are a townie unlike roonectar and Tejas) you can get on board and try and help win this thing.

If Tejas wants to nitpick, then so can I, although that tends to piss people off. Newish is not even a word. It was one I made up to help make the point. I tend to overlook roo for reasons I stated above, gave Bone the benefit after playing 3 games, and did not think about Jimmyroo, since he played a lot of games when I took a break for a while. If you feel like this is the most relevant detail out of everything I posted, then you are obviously grasping at a straw or two.

LoveLuckLaughter, I will disagree in your assessment of whether history has any impact in this game since there are enough players who have played before and people do read old games. It would only take 1 or 2. But we can agree to disagree on that. I DO AGREE on two tiered runoffs.

I lost my last game as a townie because I tried to play nice in the sandbox. Quack that. I have no idea why or how everyone is ok with LD being in this runoff. I do not know his role, but he has done nothing at this point to make people believe he is suspicious. I am resigned to be in this runoff, and I am glad tejas is in it too.

Hakuna, I appreciate the vote of confidence and thank you for pointing out a mafia tic I have to correct going forward the next time I am mafia.

TL;DR Tejas is most likely mafia. If you all want to just sit there and let the dust settle in the runoff, go for it. I am not saying lets not have a runoff. I am saying lets think critically about who the 3rd and potentially 4th member of the runoff should be. In my opinion, roo is the prime candidate for the third. Why? Even if LD is in the runoff, it is going to be dominated by Tejas v Viking. If Roo is in it, he has been a part of the conversation and would not be excluded to the extent that LD would. Having LD in now in the situation we are in wastes the chance to talk about LD until day 3 or so. You are just throwing a live body in there as a place holder.

At this point, I am sick of putting the bullseye on my back trying to influence the game. You can all do what you want.

I get that you're fired up. I'm not a fan of the playing style you employ, but it doesn't necessarily bother me. I just know that's not how I play, and it doesn't do a lot of good for me personally figuring out things.

The thing that makes me suspicious is that you seem to be waffling back and forth on the importance of runoffs. I get that you don't want people "randomly" in the runoff. I'd argue that the mafia is going to make it somewhat random, regardless of how much analysis townies try to put in. It's just numbers and having so little to go off of. I don't, at this point, have any reason to believe LD is mafia. That being said, I don't think it's out of the ordinary whatsoever to have random people placed in the runoff, either by unaware townies or scheming mafia. I don't know if he's mafia or not, but I have no problem with him being in the runoff. I wouldn't have a problem with anyone being in the runoff in the first round. It's just going to happen. You act like we can really delve deep into votes in the first round. I respectfully disagree. Maybe you're better at it that me, but I have yet to gain any actual knowledge in the first round, while the round is going on. After the fact, yes it can be very helpful, but since we have so little to go off, I rarely find anything of value while still in the first round. Maybe that's just me, but I don't start seeing real leads until the second day.

I just don't understand why you're so adamant about not having LD in a runoff, but putting Roo into a runoff. I think you can see how that stands out, at the very least.

Edit: And I'm not butthurt about the way you play. Like I said, it just doesn't help me, personally, figure things out. The fact that you point out I haven't gotten mafia the first round any time I've played is irrelevant as far as I can tell, so sounds like you might be a little butthurt. Not like I'm the only one voting for people, so I don't know how that's my fault I don't think it's too hard to understand why I wouldn't just "get on board" with people throwing out theories. I do like to think for myself...

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 10:25:30 GMT -5

I get that you're fired up. I'm not a fan of the playing style you employ, but it doesn't necessarily bother me. I just know that's not how I play, and it doesn't do a lot of good for me personally figuring out things.

The thing that makes me suspicious is that you seem to be waffling back and forth on the importance of runoffs. I get that you don't want people "randomly" in the runoff. I'd argue that the mafia is going to make it somewhat random, regardless of how much analysis townies try to put in. It's just numbers and having so little to go off of. I don't, at this point, have any reason to believe LD is mafia. That being said, I don't think it's out of the ordinary whatsoever to have random people placed in the runoff, either by unaware townies or scheming mafia. I don't know if he's mafia or not, but I have no problem with him being in the runoff. I wouldn't have a problem with anyone being in the runoff in the first round. It's just going to happen. You act like we can really delve deep into votes in the first round. I respectfully disagree. Maybe you're better at it that me, but I have yet to gain any actual knowledge in the first round, while the round is going on. After the fact, yes it can be very helpful, but since we have so little to go off, I rarely find anything of value while still in the first round. Maybe that's just me, but I don't start seeing real leads until the second day.

I just don't understand why you're so adamant about not having LD in a runoff, but putting Roo into a runoff. I think you can see how that stands out, at the very least.

I will put this very clearly since you seem to be having some trouble. The point of this game is to kill mafia. Runoffs are a tool to do that but not the only tool. When we have one and we do not have any information, I like big runoffs. However, runoffs are not the only tool or even the best tool in my estimation. Getting people to talk and to post is.

You can sit back and say lets throw random people into the runoff all you want and you will have about a 28% chance of even getting 1 mafia member day 1. Thats the cold hard math. Or you can stir up a lot of shit and dust and get people out of their comfort zone, which I have obviously done to see who responds how. Doing that could potentially mislead people, but as the saying goes, "The truth will out". Most of the time, you can sort through the shit and get at least 1 to 2 candidates as potential mafia this way. It at least pits people against each other so they have to take a stand. Then you can play your voting pattern style day 2. Day 2 is essentially a reset with more info.

As for LD, I have no strong feelings about him one way or another. He has had a total of 3 posts, and I have been pretty clear on my thoughts about Tejas both at the time of his post and subsequent to that. He may be mafia or he may be a townie, but I do not think having him in the runoff is going to help us figure out who he is. And yes, I realize this makes it incredibly suspicious to someone like you, but I am just trying to apply some logic to this warm body, random chance situation which is my biggest frustration in this game.

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 10:29:03 GMT -5

odysseus I am frustrated, not butthurt, about the lack of application of logic in this game. I hate leaving all of this to chance, and I hate that by stirring things up, I put a target on my back every game, but if no one else wants to work to figure this out day one, I am going to keep doing what I do.

Post by Boner on Apr 22, 2013 10:29:20 GMT -5

I'm back, catching up. Jimmy really said a lot of things that I could say aswell, including the difficulty of forming your own opinion when playing catch up. Especially with all these essays. I'm not a fast reader on my best days, let alone hungover from a 3 day bender in Seattle. God bless your free pouring bartenders! If I'm to understand correctly, tajas going null leaves us with 2 person runoff between tajas and Viking. With them duking it out the last page and 1/2, it's quite suitable to have them in, But having a 3rd and a possible 2 stage runoff would be benigicial. And my original LD vote was just a placeholder and intended to get a VP. I'll be around here and there. I'm in Vancouver visiting friends till Wednesday night, but I'll have more time to dick around here. Some very interesting theory's could be made out of this first round, but I'm going to keep it as simple as possible and not send myself down the rabbit hole

Boneroo>>>LD>>>BogartI want a 3 person runoff at least, it had to be somebody.

Post by Boner on Apr 22, 2013 10:48:07 GMT -5

I should have refreshed before posting. My post goes against th "throwing a 3rd person into the runoff randomly". But I don't want to have the 3 most talkative people in the runoff to be honest. 1st round, as hard as we try, is still just a guessing game, until we see dome more vote movements, it's all just talk.I'm banking on the slight chance I threw a mafia member into the runoff, maybe make some people nervous and see some interesting votes.

Post by odysseus on Apr 22, 2013 11:04:42 GMT -5

I'm going to refrain from posting the angry message I had typed up. Just know Viking, that your playing style and similar playing styles really just make me want to talk less and not play at all.

For the record, feel free to throw Bogart into the runoff, but I used him as a VP and will change my vote when it gets to a runoff. Just trying to be transparent so it doesn't come across as suspicious later.

Post by WLViking on Apr 22, 2013 11:21:24 GMT -5

I'm going to refrain from posting the angry message I had typed up. Just know Viking, that your playing style and similar playing styles really just make me want to talk less and not play at all.

For the record, feel free to throw Bogart into the runoff, but I used him as a VP and will change my vote when it gets to a runoff. Just trying to be transparent so it doesn't come across as suspicious later.

Also, I really need an updated tally.

At least you are keeping with your pattern of just doing what is easiest and most comfortable for you. Don't play. People like you are the reason why the town loses. Throw Bogart in the runoff? Why? For the same reason as LD, he should not be in the runoff, and you proved my point with LD with your post just now. You are not even trying, so why would you bother playing.

Get your head out of your ass and stop letting your emotions get in the way so that MAYBE we can figure this thing out. After the game, I do not care what you do.